CDC denies cruise sector's request to lift US sailing restrictions

[nocl]

1 hour ago, charlie murphy said:

 Xavier Becerra and President joe Biden have oversight of this group, and their collective time in some type of science course work since highschool likely pushes 6 collective hours.  How's that working out for us. I thought the CDC was a reporting agency with recommendation to the HHS and the excutive office. The question remains: has the CDC over stepped it's authority in setting policy and mandates as we move throught this time of pandemic? 

I do believe that the Secretary of HHS has plenty of scientific staff and advisory committees to call on.

[nocl]

14 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

its not simply where do you want to cruise. That's answered by the quote from Wayne Gretsky, the great hockey player who said he skates to where the puck is going to be. I am not worried about today numbers, as much as concerned about what the numbers are going to be in several months.

 

I believe the cruise lines can assure relatively good safety on board, esp with everybody immunized. So the question is ports. How will they be in 6 months? Will their herd immunity follow ours, and even if not, if a ship has been immunized where is the high risk, unless there is something wrong with the immunizations.

 

But if the CDC is concerned about ports, then why not let ships sail to the 2-3 ports not on the level 4 list. (if there are an left when they get done).

Which is why I suggested, knowing it will not happen, an oversight board as I still think CDC is working on a perfect situation.

And that questioning the CDC NIH and a few others makes one a candidate for road kill.

 

Once upon a time in corporate america it was a good trait to have participative management. and ask tough questions to get to a better result and better product--apparently not any more. We want teams of "yes" people.

because the CDC is concerned that the cruise lines have port agreements in place in case of cases. Not unlike requirements in Europe. That the cruise lines have clearly defined protocols in place that are properly implemented. A bit different than the lack of clarity about requiring vaccinations and the statements that they will let us know about what specific protocols will apply to our cruise 30 days before the cruise.

[Steelers36]

1 hour ago, caribill said:

 

What I was trying to point out with my post is that even after cruising is given the USA green light, where would you want to cruise to when the rest of the world is at record setting levels of new infections?

Some folks wouldn't care if all they did was doughnuts in the Caribbean.  😉

Edited April 22, 2021 by Steelers36

[HMR74]

2 minutes ago, nocl said:

I do believe that the Secretary of HHS has plenty of scientific staff and advisory committees to call on.

I am happy you believe that. How about bias and their marching orders?

 

Go refer to the link I posted earlier about he GAO and US financial statements.  The GAO is saying we have lousy data reporting systems in the US and 5 Presidents and 12 Congresses  have turned their backs on the problem, which is one of their primary responsibilities.

 

When I see this report , I do not trust any of them, on anything. Especially on health issues. There is little if any accountability in our government. The Government Accountability Office calls out the problems but again I say it falls on deaf ears. Its not fun to do the real difficult grunt work of fixing serious problems.

[nocl]

2 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

I am happy you believe that. How about bias and their marching orders?

 

Go refer to the link I posted earlier about he GAO and US financial statements.  The GAO is saying we have lousy data reporting systems in the US and 5 Presidents and 12 Congresses  have turned their backs on the problem, which is one of their primary responsibilities.

 

When I see this report , I do not trust any of them, on anything. Especially on health issues. There is little if any accountability in our government. The Government Accountability Office calls out the problems but again I say it falls on deaf ears. Its not fun to do the real difficult grunt work of fixing serious problems.

so basically in your mind the only valid oversight is someone that would disagree with them. Since the Secretary of HHS from 2 different administrations from two different parties apparently are not. 

[mv_hana]

2 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

I am happy you believe that. How about bias and their marching orders?

 

Go refer to the link I posted earlier about he GAO and US financial statements.  The GAO is saying we have lousy data reporting systems in the US and 5 Presidents and 12 Congresses  have turned their backs on the problem, which is one of their primary responsibilities.

 

When I see this report , I do not trust any of them, on anything. Especially on health issues. There is little if any accountability in our government. The Government Accountability Office calls out the problems but again I say it falls on deaf ears. Its not fun to do the real difficult grunt work of fixing serious problems.

11 operating divisions including 8 agencies amongst others under HHS. One of those NIH. I can tell you there many very dedicated PhDs & MDs at NIH who are committed to their research regardless of pressure.

[HMR74]

7 minutes ago, nocl said:

so basically in your mind the only valid oversight is someone that would disagree with them. Since the Secretary of HHS from 2 different administrations from two different parties apparently are not. 

I would not use the snarky phrase  "only disagree with them" , but someone or a group to "challenge them", or any agency on whatever govt is doing, because the voters have very limited ability to do that.

Just  look at how Congress on important issues votes with their party--tell me that so few people have independent minds.

 

But, if we have low expectations we will not be disappointed.

 

BTW, I have cancelled my 2021 cruises and booked 2022's  at an increased cost, as I see too much uncertainty about approval, and then hassle and risk needs to be ironed out to my satisfaction, including I do not choose to be a guinea pig for early cruises for the enjoyment and what used to be a great experience of cruising. I hope the great experience will return.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HMR74]

16 minutes ago, mv_hana said:

11 operating divisions including 8 agencies amongst others under HHS. One of those NIH. I can tell you there many very dedicated PhDs & MDs at NIH who are committed to their research regardless of pressure.

I am certain there are many very dedicated and committed. My daughter is an atty with the government, but when she was in a supervisory role, she had some not so kind words for a chunk of her colleagues. She now has been picked to clean up others messes eg, court cases challenged/re-litigated)

Somewhere between the grunt work and the decision making is no mans judgement  land. Its that judgement I bring into question and  lot of the time its management. eg, I bring the judgement of CDC into play as did they choose to go too far on these issues.

 

Airlines?? they receive to much money to snark back at the government They cannot afford to rock the boat. And thats the independance issue and the problems with lobbys

 

There is a problem otherwise we woudl not have the disconnect between the Cruis elnes and CDC

 

 

[HMR74]

44 minutes ago, Steelers36 said:

Some folks wouldn't care if all they did was doughnuts in the Caribbean.  😉

LOL, true for many.

However, in one of the prior threads we were reminded that there is an old law that makes leaving and returning to a US port is a no no unless there is a foreign port in between.

Edited April 22, 2021 by HMR74

[mv_hana]

20 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

I am certain there are many very dedicated and committed. My daughter is an atty with the government, but when she was in a supervisory role, she had some not so kind words for a chunk of her colleagues. She now has been picked to clean up others messes eg, court cases challenged/re-litigated)

Somewhere between the grunt work and the decision making is no mans judgement  land. Its that judgement I bring into question and  lot of the time its management. eg, I bring the judgement of CDC into play as did they choose to go too far on these issues.

 

Airlines?? they receive to much money to snark back at the government They cannot afford to rock the boat. And thats the independance issue and the problems with lobbys

 

There is a problem otherwise we woudl not have the disconnect between the Cruis elnes and CDC

 

 

Not disputing and agree with your comment. There is certainly a degree of ethic issues and toxic culture across all industries/agencies, etc. & it's so disheartening for those that are dedicated. We will never truly know the dynamics of what is playing into the CDC amongst others.

 

[nocl]

52 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

I would not use the snarky phrase  "only disagree with them" , but someone or a group to "challenge them", or any agency on whatever govt is doing, because the voters have very limited ability to do that.

Just  look at how Congress on important issues votes with their party--tell me that so few people have independent minds.

 

But, if we have low expectations we will not be disappointed.

 

BTW, I have cancelled my 2021 cruises and booked 2022's  at an increased cost, as I see too much uncertainty about approval, and then hassle and risk needs to be ironed out to my satisfaction, including I do not choose to be a guinea pig for early cruises for the enjoyment and what used to be a great experience of cruising. I hope the great experience will return.

 

 

 

 

 

 

well what other conclusion could one draw. You consider the CDC to be wrong and have gone too far. You do not think that those that do have oversight. That just happen to agree with the CDC are the right ones to have over sight.

 

So that leaves those that would not agree with the CDC.  Otherwise you apparently would not be happy with their over sight either for some reason or another.

[HMR74]

22 minutes ago, mv_hana said:

Not disputing and agree with your comment. There is certainly a degree of ethic issues and toxic culture across all industries/agencies, etc. & it's so disheartening for those that are dedicated. We will never truly know the dynamics of what is playing into the CDC amongst others.

 

you have no idea unless you have been exposed to it.

eg, I had to deal with the IRS in my career,  and the company was audited every year as we were in the big case group. My best strategy was to give the IRS auditors a private conference room and the old 800 watts lines--they spent at least 1/2 their budgeted time on the phone, with 90 minute lunches

 

There is a lot behind the CDC which in the October 2020 document admitted that the cruise lines would not be able to comply with it all. It was a negotiating tactic but the CDC is not negotiating nor listening to what may , or may not be better ideas from the Cruise lines. We do not know as the CDC is non responsive.

 

 

The cruise lines imho have nothing to be gained by shortcutting procedures at this time--if the results are bad across the board when they do start sailing, the customers, us, will vote with our pocketbooks as soon as we see good or not so good, or bad reviews right here on Cruise Critic.

 

We can talk and speculate here all we want to blow off steam, however, in the end, money talks, and     walks.

Edited April 22, 2021 by HMR74

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

There is a lot behind the CDC which in the October 2020 document admitted that the cruise lines would not be able to comply with it all. It was a negotiating tactic but the CDC is not negotiating nor listening to what may , or may not be better ideas from the Cruise lines. We do not know as the CDC is non responsive.

Even taking a cruise line promise that all crew and pax will be vaccinated, they have not provided an action plan as to how they intend to implement, or enforce this.  These vague recommendations and promises are not what the CDC expects from a regulated industry.  The regulators set a requirement, the industry responds with how they think they can meet the requirement, and then the regulators respond, accepting some or all of the plan, or stating what needs to be improved.  To date, none of the cruise lines have submitted any action plans other than plans for mitigation of covid among crew.  Why not?  They are not responsive, so why should CDC be any more responsive?

[HMR74]

16 minutes ago, nocl said:

well what other conclusion could one draw. You consider the CDC to be wrong and have gone too far. You do not think that those that do have oversight. That just happen to agree with the CDC are the right ones to have over sight.

 

So that leaves those that would not agree with the CDC.  Otherwise you apparently would not be happy with their over sight either for some reason or another.

Huh?

the CDC has been non responsive except to say no. My way or the highway. and when months pass and after big bucks have been spent by cruise lines for HVAC systems, redesigns of buffets,  and medical staffs and size of medical space and cabins set aside foregoing revenues just in case,   and whatever else the lines offered to do the CDC has been slow to even respond.

Where is the oversight that has the power to intercede and prod the CDC along, or let that person or group with oversight, say to the cruise lines, hey, we are in power here, so don't plan on sailing again till you do it our way. That's the message I get.

 

[nocl]

Just now, HMR74 said:

Huh?

the CDC has been non responsive except to say no. My way or the highway. and when months pass and after big bucks have been spent by cruise lines for HVAC systems, redesigns of buffets,  and medical staffs and size of medical space and cabins set aside foregoing revenues just in case,   and whatever else the lines offered to do the CDC has been slow to even respond.

Where is the oversight that has the power to intercede and prod the CDC along, or let that person or group with oversight, say to the cruise lines, hey, we are in power here, so don't plan on sailing again till you do it our way. That's the message I get.

 

Did you not say that you did not think that the Sec HHS and the President provided appropriate oversight

[HMR74]

11 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Even taking a cruise line promise that all crew and pax will be vaccinated, they have not provided an action plan as to how they intend to implement, or enforce this.  These vague recommendations and promises are not what the CDC expects from a regulated industry.  The regulators set a requirement, the industry responds with how they think they can meet the requirement, and then the regulators respond, accepting some or all of the plan, or stating what needs to be improved.  To date, none of the cruise lines have submitted any action plans other than plans for mitigation of covid among crew.  Why not?  They are not responsive, so why should CDC be any more responsive?

its way past mitigation of crew--read again, the expensive new HVAC systems, installed, and advertised. no more buffetts, a no brainer. added medical staff, added equipment and procedures , cabins set aside, cleaning stations safe distance monitoring.

If the cruise lines are so lax, then all the CDC needs to do is proceed to the trial cruises. If the cruise lines pass the trials then on to limited sailing at 60% and if that's screwed up  then back to square 1 and I do not thing the cruise lines can or will let that happen, but

 

instead of a 4 step plan we now have a 5 step plan. And most everybody thought the trials would take place in April and 60 days later cruising.

 

Bottom line--nothing is moving forward for US based cruises and perhaps, others. And as I said before , its not so much cruisers like myself with limited shelf life, its that the cruise lines have a "use by date" probably not much more out than a year from now.

Done with this.

Edited April 22, 2021 by HMR74

[nocl]

14 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

Huh?

the CDC has been non responsive except to say no. My way or the highway. and when months pass and after big bucks have been spent by cruise lines for HVAC systems, redesigns of buffets,  and medical staffs and size of medical space and cabins set aside foregoing revenues just in case,   and whatever else the lines offered to do the CDC has been slow to even respond.

Where is the oversight that has the power to intercede and prod the CDC along, or let that person or group with oversight, say to the cruise lines, hey, we are in power here, so don't plan on sailing again till you do it our way. That's the message I get.

 

What exactly have the cruiselines submitted other that a couple of letters asking to be released.

 

Well now there will be meetings. So we can see if the cruise lines are serious about negotiating and actually getting sailing again under CDC over sight. Or merely complaining again about such over sight.

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

its way past mitigation of crew--read again, the expensive new HVAC systems, installed, and advertised. no more buffetts, a no brainer. added medical staff, added equipment and procedures , cabins set aside, cleaning stations safe distance monitoring

I have not seen any indication that "expensive new HVAC systems" have been installed.  I have seen where lines claim "100% fresh air" supply to spaces, but that does not mean that the air in the space is turned over once an hour, nor does it really state that there is no recirculation of the air in a space.  Even RCG's study showed that the risk of transmission via an HVAC ductwork system is virtually nil, and guess what, the CDC never once required any modification to an HVAC system.  In their requirements for crew mitigation, even on a ship that has had an outbreak of covid, the CDC does not require any modification or cleaning of the HVAC system.  Whatever the cruise lines have done to their HVAC systems, and believe me, they have not gone to non-recirculation systems because they could not cool the air enough without adding several more generators, it is at most HEPA filters, and even ASHRAE says this "may" help in mitigation, but they are mainly talking residential systems, with very short runs.  As to the other things, like medical staff, testing equipment, etc, that was required for the crew, which they knew, and did months ago.  And, it is very easy to say, "we are setting aside cabins", "we are adding cleaning and sanitation procedures", but it is far different to have a plan that details how this is to be done, not just what.  Look at the Healthy Sail Panel report, which everyone comments is 60+ pages.  The VSP, an actual action plan to mitigate another form of infectious disease, requires a 129 page construction manual, and a 236 page operation manual.  Where are the detailed plans for covid mitigation from the cruise lines?

[capriccio]

4 hours ago, HMR74 said:

Here is the summary  GAO work for the US financial statements at 9/30/20-this was the 24th straight  annual letter like this-which there or has been sent to Presidents, and Congressional leaders both parties since 1996--what it says is we have material deficiencies in US accounting and data cannot be relied upon.

 

 

 

What it says is that some agencies and departments have material deficiencies, not the entire government.  When I first started consulting with the federal government in the late 1970s I worked on a study documenting the US Army's accounting systems; all 27 of them!  It would seem from a quick look at the summary provided that DoD is still a basket case.  On the other hand, the State Department had clean audits the entire time I worked with them (2001 - 2012) but the summary doesn't list those departments that provide reliable accounting data and you tar the entire government with a very broad and mistaken brush. 

 

Not to get into the weeds but accounting systems are not cheap to install and maintain and are seldom at the top of any governmental department's funding requests.  While you and I agree that they are important, too often Congress in their budget and appropriation roles doesn't agree with us.

[HMR74]

28 minutes ago, capriccio said:

 

What it says is that some agencies and departments have material deficiencies, not the entire government.  When I first started consulting with the federal government in the late 1970s I worked on a study documenting the US Army's accounting systems; all 27 of them!  It would seem from a quick look at the summary provided that DoD is still a basket case.  On the other hand, the State Department had clean audits the entire time I worked with them (2001 - 2012) but the summary doesn't list those departments that provide reliable accounting data and you tar the entire government with a very broad and mistaken brush. 

 

Not to get into the weeds but accounting systems are not cheap to install and maintain and are seldom at the top of any governmental department's funding requests.  While you and I agree that they are important, too often Congress in their budget and appropriation roles doesn't agree with us.

What the letter said, and its the last 31 pages of a 250 page report, is the books and  records of the US in its entity is unauditable. That link will take you back to the full report. The GAO report also states that the US is on an unsustainable fiscal path, but implies the elimination of waste and fraud could take care of that but the systems do not cleanly identify where that it. Except DOD  where one year they upon audit they  think 600 billion was missing.  So that means while costly, the systems need to be updated often.

 

Companies are spending a ton on systems. I now buy the annual fee Office 365 for my PC and MAC, rather than buying a periodic package for $400 for 3 PC's.

 

Its a totally different subject, however, if Congress cannot balance budgets and fix fiscal problems why should we trust Congress or any agency that report to Congress for anything. Perhaps they need to spend more time on fixing real problems and less time campaigning and fund raising.

 

This is how Congress got slush funds.

 

And I am not tar and feathering it all, the GAO is.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by HMR74

[caribill]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Even taking a cruise line promise that all crew and pax will be vaccinated, they have not provided an action plan as to how they intend to implement, or enforce this.  These vague recommendations and promises are not what the CDC expects from a regulated industry.

 

Since only a handful of countries (and not the ones that usually supply crews for cruise ships) have a way of proving vaccination status, I do not see how any cruise line can prove crew and passengers have been vaccinated.

[KeepCalmBearOn]

OMG, Biden just issued a waiver to the Jones Act in response to the Colonial Pipeline "crisis" that has been going on for a week, but won't issue Jones Act waivers to help Alaskan Americans salvage their businesses.

[K.T.B.]

12 minutes ago, scottca075 said:

OMG, Biden just issued a waiver to the Jones Act in response to the Colonial Pipeline "crisis" that has been going on for a week, but won't issue Jones Act waivers to help Alaskan Americans salvage their businesses.

 

Sigh...

 

Jones Act regulates maritime commerce, it has nothing to do with cruise lines.  The act that would need to be waived to help Alaska and cruise lines is Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA).

[KeepCalmBearOn]

2 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

Sigh...

 

Jones Act regulates maritime commerce, it has nothing to do with cruise lines.  The act that would need to be waived to help Alaska and cruise lines is Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA).

 

Le sigh, le heave....

 

The Jones Act is the other side of the coin of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886.

 

The point is, if the President can so easily grant waivers from one federal law, he can do it for others.

[Steelers36]

2 hours ago, scottca075 said:

The point is, if the President can so easily grant waivers from one federal law, he can do it for others.

Being ABLE to do something is lot different from WANTING to do something.